The count to 100 thread

As I have not stated here whether or not mods make the right decisions, I think I must be reading your post incorrectly because I simply stated earlier

Assuming the parameters of the forum are not infringed by a thread (by that I'm assuming family oriented forum), shouldn't those distinctions be made, as they seem to be currently, by the mods, which albeit are made post post?

But by allowing diversity of topic you satisfy a greater variety of interests and attract and retain a greater audience, surely something sponsors and advertisers want too.

I have an interest, to a degree, in the PC side of things so I look at some of those threads and articles. I don't have an interest in cars though so I don't look at motor threads. Isn't it that simple? I can, however, appreciate the frustration of trying to find a motor thread if a category is swamped with things I'm not interested in.

It would seem all that needs to be done, as stated by a number of users here, is a restructure to ensure those who aren't interested in what could be considered a little light relief, which they do not seem to classify as a real interest, are not bothered by them and do not have to engage in their frivolity. Then they can focus on what interests them. But those who are can still enjoy their moments of escape.

And also stated already in this thread, if existing mods are not interested in using their time to monitor the frivolous threads, which I can understand, get someone who is prepared to do it.

 

Sorry. My post was more meant as a general rhetorical question than a criticism of your comment.


But since we are on that topic:

Separating threads full of spam from "serious" threads by using rules will always be difficult. Some threads may have a set topic but can still be spam, while some threads could differ very much from the original topic, but still be spam-free.

In my opinion a post is defined as spam as soon as the post don't contain any useful information. However, commenting on a work log giving compliments isn't strictly useful but isn't spam in my opinion.

It's usually reasonably easy to make that distinction in real life, though. Just imagine a real conversation. If a thread looks like a conversation between drunk people, it's usually spam. It may be fun for a while, but gets old very fast (of you are sober yourself).


I do think that some people make this harder than it really is.

 

Surely the only way to make everybody happy would make a sub-section where all the games/stuff could go, (Could even call it "Forum Games"!) where post counts don't count, it doesn't show up in search parameters, and there are rules to get in (The only reason people would boost post count would be to use the selling section, so have it available to those who reach it).

Then, this stops the people whining that moan about how it's taking up precious space on the General Discussion forum, and it makes other users happy. The only real problem is there is one extra board. Even have it invisible to users until they reach certain parameters, such as a certain post count, so it doesn't scare them off.

 

You do realise this is going to end up seeming like a chat in a thread don't you?

You seem to be stating (forgive me if I'm wrong) that if something does not impart useful information (by whose definition useful?) that it therefore must be spam.

Question for you (which I'm just using as an example): in real life do you play scrabble? If you do, technically you could be seen as playing a variation of First Word, IN REAL LIFE!!!

People who play scrabble are not usually deemed as stupid or frivolous or inappropriate or irrelevant so why categorise what is a essentially a word game on the i/n as such, just because you are not interested in it?

I guess my point is whilst I agree some (to use your term) spam is genuinely spam, some spam you consider as spam is not necessarily spam to other reasonably intelligent people (and I'm including myself in that category rightly or wrongly) and to be facetious some information of interest is just plan nerdy! It depends on who you are and what your interests are.

But what's wrong with catering for a wide range, provided it is not offensive and against the family forum ethos?

 

Spam threads are not against the family forum ethos specifically, but they do work directly against the purpose of forums, which is - by definition of the word - to provide discussion. If nothing is being discussed or contributed it is not a forum thread: it is a spam thread. The two are anathema to each other. If you want to know whether a thread belongs on a forum, simply ask "is it a discussion or an exchange of information?" If so, it belongs on a forum.

At a glance, you'd think any thread falls under this. A thread would have to be pretty brainless not to involve the exchange of information. But aside from the occasional quips, the Count to 100 thread was precisely that - a thread containing no information or discussion.

 

True, yet still none of us consider this thread as spam.

I do and I don't. It's a matter of context. As I said, if you for instance give compliments in a thread it isn't spam in my opinion even though it doesn't really contain useful information.

And It's the mods that must define what's "useful", if possible.

It's a matter of location. You wouldn't play Scrabble in the middle of a board meeting, would you? In a party, however, Scrabble would be a perfectly appropriate activity.

If people want to play, go to a place made for games and nonsense (4chan is perfect for this). (And before you say it: Yes, someone have to define what is nonsense)

What can I say? I'm egocentric and obviously have no problem with that.

(Seriously, though. I'm simply stating my opinion. Only time will tell if anyone will listen to my opinions.)

 

I like interacting with you guys/gals, pointless threads 'n' all!

And I'm sure, or at least I hope, that you feel the same!

 

I think they all have a place makes it a meeting place for the members and not some dry old farts forum lol

 

I'd have to say that I totally agree with both statements.

 

Boiled_Elephant and Smilodon,

Thank you both for pointing out the error in my understanding. Prior to seeking the advice of the wise on this site I've never been on a forum, chat/game or other frivolous website before. I pretty much only used it for business, emailing, oh and buying shiny things.

I do have 2 points to make though:

1) I'd never go to a party where they played scrabble for entertainment, I'm not that sad

2) You're right, I have never played scrabble in any company board meeting I've attended, but equally I wouldn't be so pretentious to imply this forum compared to a company board meeting either.

Normally I wouldn't be blatantly rude but when patronised needs must as they say, whoever they are.

 

I have to agree with both of these statements

 

+1

I really don't need to be playing scrabble at a party, my spellings bad enough when I'm sober..lol

 

Now now Jeff you're not trying to start the Count to 100 thread again here are you?

If so, +2

 

+3

 

Shhhh, i thought I was getting away with it then

 

Is that a + 4 then jeff lol

 

No, he just likes short trousers

 

+ 5 to that

 

It's a bit sad to see people making arguments for having threads to have fun when they can't even behave in a relatively serious thread.


Way to destroy ones credibility..

 

TBH I couldn't give a rats a*se about the count to 100 thread nor my post count yes it was spam But I think you would have all threads that didnt fit in your little boxes closed you just take yourself to seriously
And as for credibility I dont need it with you lol The only people that my credibility matters to are the people I do business with and its in good shape with them so much has been said in this thread and yet so much missed.
I say no more .